Thursday, May 31, 2012

Well BobIger finally got around to naming a successor to his failure with Rich Ross...

After the experiment of letting a young Suit with nothing more than television experience be put in charge of the film division, it appears adults are now in charge.

AlanHorn, a seasoned veteran of Warner Bros. has been put in charge of all the Mouse's film slate. Unlike Ross, he's got a deep history in Hollywood and knows his way around the town and has the respect of talent across every spectrum. He also had a hand in Warner while films like "Batman Begins" and the "Harry Potter" franchise were created. It would be nice if he were to develop films that were that iconic and successful with the Mouse.

There are rumors that Iger dangled the carrot of possibly being suggested to succeed him in a few years as CEO/Chairman. I hope that's not the case, as much as I think Horn is a great fit for the job, I would prefer to see TomStaggs get that title. Not that I would think he would be bad for the job, just my personal preference. I wouldn't be complaining unless Jay Rasulo got that job because I'd have to believe that ancient Mayan curse was true, just a few years late.

Here is the press release:

BURBANK, Calif. – May 31, 2012 – Bob Iger, Chairman and CEO of The Walt Disney Company, announced today that Alan Horn has been named Chairman of The Walt Disney Studios effective June 11. Horn will oversee worldwide operations for The Walt Disney Studios including production, distribution and marketing for live-action and animated films from Disney, Pixar and Marvel, as well as marketing and distribution for DreamWorks Studios films released under the Touchstone Pictures banner. Disney’s music and theatrical divisions will also report to Horn.

Horn has been a prominent figure in the film and television industry overseeing creative executive teams responsible for some of the world’s most successful entertainment properties including the Harry Potter film franchise and the hit television series Seinfeld among others.

“Alan not only has an incredible wealth of knowledge and experience in the business, he has a true appreciation of movie making as both an art and a business,” said Iger. “He’s earned the respect of the industry for driving tremendous, sustained creative and financial success, and is also known and admired for his impeccable taste and integrity. He brings all of this to his new role leading our studio group, and I truly look forward to working with him.”

“I’m incredibly excited about joining The Walt Disney Company, one of the most iconic and beloved entertainment companies in the world,” said Horn. “I love the motion picture business and look forward to making a contribution as part of Bob Iger’s team working closely with the dedicated and talented group at the studio.”

Horn was most recently President and COO of Warner Bros. Entertainment where he had oversight of the Studios’ theatrical and home entertainment operations, including the Warner Bros. Pictures Group, Warner Premiere (direct-to-platform production), Warner Bros. Theatrical Ventures (live stage) and Warner Home Video. During his 12 year tenure, Warner Bros. Studios was the global box office leader seven times.

Among the numerous critically acclaimed films and box office hits released during his tenure are all eight films in the Harry Potter series, The Dark Knight, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Happy Feet, Sherlock Holmes, The Departed, Batman Begins, Million Dollar Baby, the second and third Matrix films and the Ocean’s Eleven trilogy. Horn is also an executive producer of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

Before joining Warner Bros., Horn co-founded Castle Rock Entertainment where he served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. He oversaw the creation of many critically acclaimed and beloved films including Best Picture Oscar nominees A Few Good Men, The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile as well as When Harry Met Sally, City Slickers, In the Line of Fire and the most successful show in television history, Seinfeld. Horn has also served as President and Chief Operating Officer of Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation and was Chairman and CEO of Embassy Communications.

He is a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, the American Film Institute and the Museum of Broadcasting. He serves on the Board of Directors of the American Film Institute; as a Vice Chairman of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC); is a co-founder of the Environmental Media Association (EMA); on the Board of Trustees for the Autry National Center in Los Angeles; and on the board of Harvard-Westlake School.

Horn received his MBA from Harvard Business School and served as a captain in the U.S. Air Force.

Now all we have to do is wait for late 2014/early 2015 to find out if this works...

Maybe not as good as Apple, Inc., but almost every division of the entertainment giant is doing great business. Almost. Even the film division with its $200 million write down of "John Carter" is feeling giddy right now ("Avengers" billion dollar success, "Brave" and "Wreck It Ralph"). The theme parks are firing on all cylinders with Suits so confident that they're willing to raise ticket prices to near record levels. But one division still lags behind the others:

This is the one area where BobIger's vision seems to have gone astray. It's the one area that would seem to be a given to find a success, but it's the one area that is fleeting. Interactive entertainment seems ripe for mining the many characters and properties that the Mouse owns. But for most of its efforts, and the millions that have been poured into it, the division still lacks the kind of success it was expecting.

While Warner Bros. has strategy has taken the companies it partners with and bought into a consistent brand known as Warner Games, the ones that Disney has bought have had a different result. Over the last two years, some of the companies that the Mouse bought have been closed and shuttered. Propaganda Games, creators of "Turok" and "Tron: Evolution", as well as the defunct "Pirates of the Caribbean: Armada of the Damned" was shut down in January of 2011. Black Rock Studio, creator of "Split Second: Velocity" and "Pure" suffered the same fate in June of that year. The most successful acquisition Iger has made is perhaps Warren Spector's Junction Point Studios. But even the "Epic Mickey" game was considered a disappointment from what was expected. I would love to see Disney give Spector the opportunity to make the "Ducktales" game he's desired to for sometime.

Following the disappointment, the strategy has changed to make a more concerted focus on mobile games, like the surprise hit: "Where's the Water?". While the strategy to focus on mobile platforms hasn't ended console development, I believe that it demonstrates a flaw in Iger's gaming strategy.

Instead of purchasing high end gaming companies like Blizzard/Activision, Electronic Arts, or a gaming studio on the level of Naughty Dog, the company has instead focused on smaller companies with less of a clear track record. Unlike Disney's purchase of companies like Pixar or Marvel, which have a proven track record, the entertainment giant has focused on the exact opposite type of company and gotten the exact opposite result.

If Iger was to follow his strategy of absorbing high-end, high quality companies, he could have gone after a gaming studio like Valve or possibly Bungie, creators of the "Halo" series, who is now free of Microsoft. Those and other gaming studios could have provided Disney with an established line of popular content. But instead, a different route was plotted.

Another loss of direction has been the lack of games based on properties the Mouse owns. Other than "Epic Mickey" and the canned "Pirates of the Caribbean" game, not much has been planned. There are some projects in the pipeline, but with the large collection of properties it owns, you would think the Disney company would have dozens of these games in various states of development. Not so. Even the Marvel characters haven't been fully utilized thanks to contracts that are spread over other companies. While not as extensively confined as the contracts that Marvel has with other theme parks, the situation is more limited than many Suits would like.

Hopefully, people like Warren Spector will convince Iger and the Suits to look into a strategy involving one of these companies and a marketing plan that mines the low hanging fruit that the Walt Disney Company has within its vast entertainment kingdom.

It's just interesting that the interactive division is the most inactive when it comes to profits for the media giant...

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Unlike many in the Marvel Universe, Thor doesn't have a large rouge's gallery of villains. Characters like the Fantastic Four, Captain America, Spider-Man or the X-Men have a great deal more respected and credible villains, the Norse god's enemies are not as well known. There are a few that might wind up being potential opponents in a cinematic environment.

While Loki is the most known/best foil to Thor, several other villains could play a role in the upcoming sequel. Many are asking what villain will confront the Norse god in the new film? Who could the actor hired to play him be portraying? Well, he could be playing Atum, the God Eater, a being created to consume the gods. Or maybe Desak the God Slayer of an unnamed world. Then again, Ego the Living Planet might be him, but doubtful. Kryllk the Cruel a Asgardian Troll Leader? All are possible, but I don't believe any are the villain.

In fact, if you look at the actor cast to play the lead villain, he bares a striking resemblance to a certain villain that has been a pain in Thor's side since the 80's. MadsMikkelsen is a very tall, lean actor with piercing tiny eyes. He's capable of playing a villain with cold blooded intensity. He's a charismatic Danish actor and has a Scandinavian appearance that would go with many of the villains that come from Norse mythology which Stan Lee adapted into comic form. Out of all these villains, one seems to stand out.

For those of you that don't know who he is, Malekith is the ruler of the Dark Elves in the Asgardian Nine Worlds. And his story would work with Thor 2 taking place mainly within the other realms of Thor's chronology. Since we know that Loki would play a part in the film, it also makes sense. Because in the stories, Malekith makes a pact with Loki that involves him ruling the lands of Asgard and could bring about an epic adventure that could lead to a truly "Lord of the Rings" type film for "Thor 3" if they follow the Surtur storyline. Who is Surtur? Click on the link and see the Walt Simonson run on the book as well. We now know that Thanos won't be in this film, so there won't be a plot line involving The Infinity Gauntlet. But perhaps Thor's sequel will feature The Eternal Flame? Now, if some reporter will just ask Kevin Feige this question we can see if he tries to squirm out of answering it.

But if all this turns out to be true then the sequels to Thor could be a quite interesting and radical direction that differentiates Odin's son from the rest of his underwear wearing friends on Earth...

Friday, May 25, 2012

Thirty-five years ago today, "Star Wars:Episode 4-A New Hope" premiered. I want to celebrate the future acquisition of Bob Iger/Tom Staggs on that achievement and have some advice for GeorgeLucas: Sell it! Sell it now! Go make your personal, esoteric films, Master Lucas! You still have time. Whew. Glad I got that off my chest.

I've said that various times over many, many posts in the past few years, but finally people will walk down the lands and get a true idea of what I mean. One of the great things that you will find is the thematic transition of characters in the park.

Buena Vista Street is the best example of this. Being as the areas represent periods of the California that no longer exists, or as I refer to it, Decades, the character theming is important to the presentation of these times. The official description of BVS is that it's 20's/30's, it it is essentially the Thirties. And the Carthay Circle Theater is the culmination of this narrative.

If you've ever been to TokyoDisneySEA (and shame on you if you haven't), then you know how they are able to take classic Disney characters and project them into a time, a period and have them own it. From Mediterranean Harbor where Mickey and his crew are dressed in maritime/oceanic themed costumes, Lost River Delta where Donald and his gang appear to be 30's adventurers, or the American Waterfront where everyone looks like they walked out at the turn of the Twentieth Century.

And you can go anywhere else in that marvelous gate and see the way the characters work and how the designers get it. It is a textbook example of the "Disney Way", the very reason why the Moustro was so successful. And this is one of a laundry list of things that the original DCA failed at.

That will all change when you take a stroll down Buena Vista Street. From the Newsies-type singers on the Red Car Trolley, to the period band Five and Dime or the traditional characters you see walking around interacting with guests, or the Citizens of Buena Vista Street, it will all take you to a place that you've never been if you've entered DCA before:

A Disney Park.

And we will all have a much more memorable experience. One that should have happened a decade ago were it not for blind, bean counters. But better late than never, right?

On Sunday the Suits put out their new prices to get into the park/annual passport and it was much more than most were expecting. And it could be described as the Mouse being greedy, it's also correct to say that it's a way to control the ever growing AP's that are coming to the parks monthly/weekly/daily.

While I too cringe at the thought of paying $600+ for a premium pass, the over a million annual pass holders and their spending habits have gotten Team Disney Anaheim in a position where they felt to control the coming onslaught of crowds, a line was going to have to be drawn.

With AP's walking around the parks spending far less and coming far more than tourist/foreigners it was determined that a much larger (30%) fee was going to have to be charged. Now, some have felt that this will cause less people to come and this is true. But it is also the Disneyland Resort's intention. Why would they want less people to come, you say?

Well, the crowds that will be coming over the next few months are expected to be large and the worry inside the halls in of the Suits is that controlling them and the AP's was going to be too difficult a headache. So, the decision was made to make those paying for a pass, to pay a slightly larger premium than they've paid before. Not all will renew their passes. Some will get a lower passport like the SoCal or SoCal Select (which is what the Suits wanted) or even the Deluxe. But with the resort finally being a Disney Resort, and the park finally being a Disney Park it was time to stop giving away what they felt was a package that was worth more than the price.

Now, a decade ago it could be easily argued that the price of going into DCA or a park hopper wasn't worth it. That is a much more debatable argument today. It's certainly worth more to go there, but it has yet to be determined if it's worth the price that Disney is charging. We won't really find out on June 15th either. It's more likely the success of this Extreme Expansion will not be known for a year, or at the very least till the end of the holidays.

But the confidence it shows in the new branding/offerings is the mark of a new day for the Resort...

Monday, May 14, 2012

And reports are starting to make their way on the web. Some lucky guys over at The Rotoscopers were lucky enough to catch a sneak peek of the unfinished film. Take a listen to their podcast and see if they liked it. Here's a hint: four stars.

Saturday, May 12, 2012

For those of you that can't wait for "Tron Uprising" the Mouse has given you a gift...

"Beck's Beginning" has been released to bridge the gap between now and June. It's a full half hour episode and sets the table for what is to come. Take a look inside the world of what happened between Tron and Legacy.

Now if they can get David DiGilio's script for the third film in shooting shape...

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

With "The Avengers" ready to pass a billion dollars by the end of the weekend Marvel Studios has become an amazingly successful studio...

The only other current studio with that track record is the Lamp. Pixar, is similar and different at the same time, but the success model of control, and the autonomy to create their own projects is something that they share. To be fair, they both have different content: Pixar creates original properties that become pop-culture stories and Marvel takes pop-culture properties and creates original stories. Both are well written and follow a focused plan for success.

The many division of Walt Disney Studios operate almost as separate kingdoms (no pun intended) within a larger kingdom. The irony of this is the crown jewel, Walt Disney Pictures (the live-action division) is the one division that is run by the old Hollywood model. It's also the one which is the least successful in terms of hits, both critically and financially. And it's lead by... no one really. As of right now, it's a rudderless ship adrift in a sea of high concept confusion. The failed experiment that was Rich Ross is now gone. Hopefully, Sean Bailey will get the nod to take over in the near future if Iger wants to make a smart move. He's a smart guy and with the right amount of autonomy could generate some positive creativity at the Mouse.

While at the other divisions, Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar have John Lasseter to guide it, Marvel Studios has Kevin Feige to lead it to the current state the comic book company finds itself in. I'm not saying that Feige is as creative as Lasseter, but he is as business smart and as deeply concerned about the characters and stories that he tries to bring to the silver screen. Disney's last division, Touchstone Pictures is essentially a label used to distribute DreamWorks films, and those are controlled by Steven Spielberg and Stacey Snider respectively.

All this has come about with what are many of Marvel's second tier characters. Since the heavy hitters like "Spider-Man," "X-Men," "Fantastic Four" and "Daredevil" are controlled by other studios, the studio has been limited in the direction they can take their stories, but that direction has followed a laser like focus. I try and imagine how films of the Web-Head, Mutants and Super-powered Misfits would be handled if Marvel actually controlled their presence on the screen.

I wonder if Bob Iger is somehow trying to work out deals to end all, or at least most of the agreements made with other studios for Marvel properties? If the buyout of Paramount Pictures was worth the investment, after the Avengers is it worth it to attempt to take back control of other properties? I can only imagine how a "Fantastic Four" film under the Marvel Studios banner would look compared to the weak attempt that Fox tried to make. With the disappointment of the latest "Ghost Rider" film, that property will likely fall back to Marvel just as the Punisher has now done. Spider-Man and X-Men could take a decade or more unless Iger is able to pull together a business deal that will make sense both financially and legally.

But with at least two Marvel films a year for the foreseeable future, it looks like we're going to get used to seeing men in tights for a long, long time. We have "Iron Man 3" and "Thor 2" in 2013 and "Captain America 2" and an untitled Marvel film (Uhhhant-man!! Excuse me) in 2014. The first film that will be coming out in 2015 will likely be "Avengers 2" and at least one other film later in the year. Maybe after the success of this superhero team, the Hulk will get another chance to shine in his own film again? And may I ask that Joss Whedon write the script since he seems to get the character better than previous versions. But the future looks bright for the Marvel way.

Saturday, May 5, 2012

So with BradBird successfully transitioning to live-action we can look forward to another...

But it won't be his labor of love, "1906" about the San Francisco earthquake. Instead it will be about a supernatural event, that is also named after a year, "1952."

According to the trades, Bird will board the Walt Disney Pictures' film from a script by DamonLindelof which is believed to be a tentpole film. The story is described as secret, but sci-fi or paranormal. It makes me wonder if it has something to do with the year 1952 or Fifties Era which Brad Bird captured so eloquently in his masterpiece, "The Iron Giant"? Could we see UFO's, 50's matinee monsters, I like Ike propaganda in this tale? Perhaps it is a script with elements similar to that film that appealed to his sensibility? It will be interesting to see what happens with this project/film/script.

Friday, May 4, 2012

Let's face it, until very recently, Marvel's track record of comic book movies hasn't exactly been super. After the success of DC's Batman back in the 90's, Marvel tried in vain to take their comic book franchises to the big screen but the results were both disastrous and low budget and they either went direct to home video i.e. Captain America with Matt Salinger and The Punisher with Dolph Lundgren, or never saw the light of day and were hastily buried and forgotten, i.e. the 1994 Fantastic Four whose feature film debut was, believe it or not, far worse than the two ridiculous films FOX bequeathed upon us just a few years ago.

I must admit I was not initially excited about the prospects of The Avengers movie because it had the potential for another such disaster. Fortunately that proves not to be the case with Joss Whedon's Avengers which is surprisingly the perfect big budget summer blockbuster that entertains and satisfies on so many key levels, yet, is still problematic and disappointing on several others. It's not the perfect superhero movie that many comic book nerds might be quick to proclaim it to be but it is still a damn fun comic book fantasy film and pure escapist fun.

The chemistry between Earth's mightiest heroes is handled competently and exceptionally well. Each of the four main Avengers (i.e. The REAL Fantastic Four) work well as an ensemble after appearing in their respective solo adventures. The Avengers is the real Clash of the Titans between the biggest superheroes of the Marvel universe. This is the lalapalooza of comic book movies and does what The Expendables did to the action film genre by reinvigorating it with a bravado and intensity that raises the bar for audience appetites and expectations.

Robert Downey Jr. is in particularly top form here as Tony Stark bringing his personalized comedic wit, humor and charm to the party. Downey delivers an even better performance in the Avengers than he did in the disappointing Iron Man 2. There's more for him to work with and also against as he plays off the other team members without overtaking or upstaging their performances and stealing the spotlight. You could easily say that he is the glue that holds both the team and the film together by his performance alone. The improvisational dialogue as well as the script is intelligent and snappy and Downey is the real star of the show with reserved modesty. Robert Downey Jr. IS Iron Man.

Chris Evans is the proverbial fish-out-of-water as Captain America who struggles to adjust to modern civilization after awakening from his icy stasis for 70 years. He's wound just a little too tight and takes his job as captain of the team a little too seriously and doesn't like it when the others like Tony Stark, for example, aren't taking their jobs as seriously as him. He's the perfect counterbalance to Tony Stark's irresponsible playboy recklessness and the reality check for the other members of the team.

To me Chris Hemsworth just works better here as the Mighty Thor than he did in his campy solo outing. By contrast his "adopted" brother Loki however comes off an even weaker adversary for the Avengers. He's the trickster who pulls the strings and manipulates the Avengers to turn against each other while he casually sits back and watches the mayhem with gleeful delight like the stereotypical token villain that he is. He's a god whose only agenda is to rule the Earth by way of an alien invasion from the Chitauri who are about the most generically unmemorable alien nemesis I've seen put on film in recent years. There's a moment when Thor is pleading with his brother Loki to come back and just for a moment you think that there is the possibility of his redemption to join forces and help them fight against the invasion he unleashed and it's perhaps the best moment between Thor and Loki in either film. Not once though do I feel that there is any real imminent danger or threat presented against Earth's mightiest heroes when the indestructable Hulk can simply throw a so-called deity like Loki around like a rag doll and walk away growling "Puny god" surrendering with the line "I'd like to have that drink now." Really? A god conceding defeat to the Hulk? It may gets some appreciable laughs from the crowd but the notion of it all is completely ludicrous.

Mark Ruffalo takes over the role of Bruce Banner/The Hulk from Ed Norton. Apparently Norton did not want to participate because he felt there wasn't much material for him to work with in the ensemble script and for the most part he's absolutely right. While I won't outright dismiss Ruffalo who does his best to sufficiently handle the material he has been given, I do not feel like he fits the role of Bruce Banner as well as Norton did. He feels like a mild-mannered everyman delivering his lines with an unenthusiastic boredom and I never feel that he is truly holding himself back and containing the permeating rage and anger inside of him. He seems completely subdued and unconflicted as Banner. The Hulk, on the other hand, is handled exceptionally well. Ironically as the Hulk, he nearly steals the show in some very exciting and comedic sequences that are entirely computer animated.

And then we have the two throwaway Avengers, Hawkeye and Black Widow. While Scarlett Johannson's character is utilized much more effectively with a bigger role than she had in Iron Man 2, I never really feel like she measures up to the big boys as an Avenger and neither does Jeremy Renner's Hawkeye who is compromised early on by Loki and his trust as a member of the team I feel is never fully redeemed. Aside from being a master archer with a bow that would make both Legolas and Katniss proud, he brings nothing useful to the party as a mere mortal whose job as an agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. is to supposedly keep the other team members in line when neither he nor Black Widow seem to possess superpowers of any kind other than their technical expertise with weapons and martial arts which begs the question; just what exactly is the criteria to become an Avenger?

Tony Stark has superhuman abilities only when he wears the invincible Iron Man armor, Captain America is a genetically engineered supersoldier with a shield made of the strongest alloy on Earth that is so indestructible that it can apparently withstand an impact from the Thor's hammer Mjolnir. That being the case it completely defeats the point of Thor's hammer in a paper-wraps-stone kind of way. Thor, like his brother and adversary Loki is a deity invincible to all mortals. How then do you kill a god? The Hulk seems every bit as indestructible as they are as he can apparently withstand a barrage of artillery, can leap tall buildings in a single bound, and smash even the gods themselves with his bare hands without destroying them. What are his limitations? In the Marvel universe logic and science apparently have no applications or limitations. In other words, try not to think about such things and just go with it (wink-nod).

Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury as commander and chief is also pretty unspectacular. Aside from trying to take out a jet with a rocket launcher, Fury's role is pretty much relegated behind the scenes from aboard S.H.I.E.L.D.'s mammoth heli-carrier giving orders and answering to the big military general types in charge of S.H.I.E.L.D. operations. I'd really like to have seen Fury given a more active role on the front lines. His assistant Cobie Smulders is also a pretty worthless and disposable character. She's the first person I'd kill off followed by Hawkeye and Black Widow when the need for collateral damage cannon fodder is necessitated.

Clark Gregg returns as Agent Phil Coulson. He has made an appearance in almost every Marvel film leading up to the Avengers and is given a deservedly expanded part in the Avengers. He is the perfect agent for S.H.I.E.L.D and is far more likable a character who is essential to both the Avengers and S.H.I.E.L.D than Cobie Smulders or Hawkeye or even Black Widow. Coulson rocks.

In spite of the nitpicks and nuances, The Avengers still delivers on all essential levels. Joss Whedon has accomplished an insurmountable feat by juggling the complexities of several unique characters and handling them in very humanly relatable situations. The plot is superfluous to the superhuman performances and abilities of the ensemble cast members. You don't watch professional wrestling because it's real. All that really matters is that this is a team that kicks butt and takes no prisoners. They are indeed Earth's mightiest heroes.